Upon beginning this course it was my hope that I would learn how to effectively integrate technology with curriculum and instruction in order to improve student’s achievement. I also hoped to become more knowledgeable of digital resources and to increase my understanding of the ethical and acceptable use questions surrounding the use of technology. That was what I hoped for at the beginning of the course, now at the end of the course I can honestly say that my digital “accent” is considerably less than it was before. The outcomes of the course not only aligned with those that I had envisioned, they exceeded them. Where I had only hoped to become more technology literate, I gained a strong understanding of the issue surrounding the use of technology. Where I had envisioned understanding the use of technology at the campus level, I gained a much broader district level understanding. The National Educational Technology Standards and the STaR charts took on a whole new meaning to me. I had no idea the extent to which the nation and the state have invested time, money and resources into technology. What I thought was just a haphazard array of mismatched components is really a well thought out and inspiring plan.
This new knowledge that I now carry proudly is completely relevant to what I do at my school. I can use the knowledge to increase staff motivation in the area of learning new technology. I have already begun by creating a book study blog. In the past when we did a book study it meant meeting in person for more than an hour for as many as 10-12 weeks. Now with the book study blog, we can work at our own pace, and delve as deeply into the subject as we choose without sacrificing any time that could be spent working directly or indirectly with students. Since I had hoped to learn how to merge technology and curriculum, this course has acted as a matchmaker. Now, I can use technology to present staff development that will allow teachers to simultaneously learn new technology while creating new lessons in their core subject areas.
It would be challenging, to say the least, to think of any way in which this course did not meet the learning outcomes that I had envisioned. If pressed, I would say that the only shortcomings I found were in the issue of depth. Because my knowledge level at the beginning this course was so low, there were times when a reading or lecture left me with more questions than answers. Truthfully though, I did not see this as a problem, but more as a prompt to push myself further, gather more knowledge and ask more questions.
One of the greatest things about this course was the way in which the assignments were shared. I had never read a blog before, much less published one. I found the whole experience energizing. The directions for creating a blog, creating a power point and posting to the blog were user friendly and simple to follow. I had some trouble posting my action plan to the blog, but that was overcome with a little bit of ingenuity. There were some times, like when creating the action plan for my campus, that I wished for an example to follow, but I really think that when we ask students to create work we should expect them to do it on their own. Once we show them an example, all we really get are new versions of the example. By not giving examples we truly get student created work. The one caution I have here is that if we are going to allow students to truly create, we must not have a preconceived notion of how their work should look when it is finished. We should allow for individual differences in style and our grades should be based on whether or not they included the essential elements of the task, not what their final product looks like.
I learned so much about myself during this course. I never had any technology confidence, but I would say that my confidence increased dramatically as a direct result of taking this course. I learned how to create and use a blog; because of this my campus is now doing our traditional book study in blog form. I learned what wikis are and am in the process of planning staff development that incorporates their use. I learned why we fill out the STaR chart each year and how truly important it is to each district and campus. All of this, and so much more, made me feel more confident and more willing to take on leadership roles that involved the use of technology.
I keep returning to the subject of blogs, but I think that is because learning about them had such a profound effect on me. I believe that they are valuable tool to the 21st century learner. Because of blogs, students can now publish their work in a form that has the potential to reach thousands of people. In the past, our only choices for publishing student work were creating a class book, hanging them in the hallway or hoping to get them posted into a public place like a library. Not only does blogging allow students to publish in a whole new way, it allows them to read the work of their classmates and to collaborate with other students all over the world.
I realize that with blogging comes a whole new set of responsibilities, but that is true of any new learning venue. When you take students on a field trip to a museum you teach them before hand what to expect, how to behave and what to be cautious about. Blogging is no different. We must be responsible and teach our students how to maneuver in the digital world, just as we do in the real world.
Through our discussion boards and our readings I have also learned many new ways that blogging can be used to communicate with all stakeholders. One suggestion was to use blogs to pass on information about upcoming events such as field trips or class presentations. In this way parents and other stakeholders could have up to date information at their finger tips. Another suggestion was to use blogs in an online version of a class newsletter. Make it shorter because parents are less willing to scroll down two pages of text than they are to read the front and back of a paper you send home, but include interesting things that are happening in you class and even post pictures of student work. Finally, it was suggested to use blogs as a ways to post everything from class schedules to lunch menus. All of these suggestions were very helpful, and I will begin the process of creating a class blog as soon as I have administrative approval.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Monday, December 14, 2009
Technology Action Plan and Organizational Chart
Technology Action Plan
Description: The administration, faculty and staff at Clinton P. Russell Elementary school plan to improve student achievement by gathering, analyzing and using data from a variety of sources in order to make informed decisions regarding the integration of technology into curriculum and instruction.
Goals:
• Increase the use of technology to gather and analyze data by 90%.
• Increase the use of available technology in the classroom by 90%.
• Develop a plan for consistent formative assessments that are analyzed in a timely manner in order to impact learning.
• Provide ongoing staff development to meet technology goals.
Tasks Timeline Person(s) Responsible Status
Meet with all stakeholders to review STaR Chart Data familiarize faculty with the National Educational Technology Standards in order evaluate the needs of the school in regards to technology. February, 2010 Mary Haywood (Principal)
Dee Skaggs (Committee Chair) On January 4th, 2010, the committee will present a power point detailing recent STaR Chart data and establishing a committee to use the information as a guideline for reaching NET*S.
Develop a cadre of key personnel to be trained in the use of AEISit software and hardware. November, 2009 Mary Haywood (Principal)
Dee Skaggs, Rick Farrell, Paula Williams (Committee Members) The committee received training in November. The scanners have been ordered and paid for and are scheduled for delivery in late December.
Initiate a system of monthly meetings that are designed to evaluate student data. May, 2010 Mary Haywood (Principal) Rick Farrell, Paula Williams, Shannon Loftis, Rhenette Simpson (CILT) Content meetings are in place which focus on:
• What we want the students to learn.
• How we will measure their learning.
• What we will do if students are having difficulty learning.
The next component to be added is to create a uniform system of assessment and evaluation of that data.
Create and administer a technology needs’ assessment that is personalized to the school environment. January, 2010 Mary Haywood (Principal)
Dee Skaggs (Committee Member) Using the STaR Chart as a guide, the committee is developing a technology needs’ assessment, that allows for scaffolding to reach goals.
Inventory all available technology (hardware and software) in a concise and user friendly manner in order managed our technology assets and stop “pc drift”. February, 2010 Mary Haywood (Principal) ‘
Omar Harris (Campus Technology Directory) An inventory list has been created. The next step is to visit each room in the building, including storage rooms, to document exactly what is available on the campus.
Progress Report
Date Range: October 2009 – May 2010 Team: Clinton P. Russell Technology Team Participants:
M. Haywood, D. Skaggs, R. Farrell, P. Williams, O. Harris, K. Meador, R. Simpson, S. Loftis
Project Description of Project: Clinton P. Russell Elementary set out to improve student achievement by gathering, analyzing and using data from a variety of sources in order to make informed decisions regarding the integration of technology into curriculum and instruction. The project components are: Address staff development needs, asset management and data analysis, all in keeping with Richard DuFours’ ideas that Professional Learning Communities should focus on what the students need to know, ways in which to assess students achievement, and procedures to follow when students are not achieving as expected.
Staff Development Staff Development will focus on the following topics.
• Creating a shared vision that incorporates technology and learning through the use of digital-age resources. Begin by reviewing STaR Chart data. Allow participants to discuss “Why” we are stuck at the Developing Tech. stage, and facilitate a discussion of “How” to move forward.
• The use of hardware and software that is already located on our campus, but is be underused because personnel do not have the proper training or motivation. Review the campus data packet and the CIP. Use data analysis to identify the lowest student expectation from each content area. Create staff development sessions that use technology to improve student achievement in an attempt to integrate instruction and technology.
• Asset management that will allow all faculty members “as needed” access to computer hardware through a system of documented sharing. Staff development session will focus on the available hardware, its uses, how and when to use it, where it is stored, and how to set it up.
• Implement a series of three staff development on the use of AEISit tools.
• Session 1: Using the AEISit software.
• Session 2: Designing common assessments and using the scanner.
• Session 3: Interpreting the data from common assessments and using the data to increase achievement.
• Begin a book study blog. Participants increase their technology comfort level and skills while at the same time increasing their knowledge of their craft.
Evaluation In a effort to appraise the worthiness of all staff development activities in relation to student achievement evaluation will focus on participant’s learning, their use of the new knowledge and the impact it has had on student learning.
• Participant’s Learning: Participants will show mastery of use of new technology through simulations. Participants will “hook up” hardware such as SMART Boards, document cameras, classroom response systems and projectors. Participants will also show mastery of the use of software and programs such as AEISit, SMART technologies, e-blog, and other programs.
• Participant’s Use of New Knowledge and Skills: Learning Walks and peer-to-peer evaluations will be used to access participants use of new technologies.
• Student Learning Outcomes: Campus Data Packet, AEIS data, common assessment and district benchmarks will be used to access the impact of participant’s learning on student achievement.
Results The action plan will be revisited on a monthly basis. Results will be documented and changes will be made as needed to facilitate the integration of technology, curriculum, instruction and student learning.
Job Descriptions
• Superintendent of Schools: Sets policy and objectives as related to technology.
• Information and Technology Executive Director: Implements the superintendant’s policies and objectives as they relate to technology.
• Learning Community Director: interprets and understands the policies and objectives set by the superintendent, transmits information to principals and oversees training and implementation as related to technology.
• Principal: Oversees the implementation of technology at the campus level and coordinates training for the campus technology coordinator. Monitors implementation of technology at the campus level.
• Campus Technology Director: Oversees training for the teachers at the campus level as it pertains to technology.
• Teachers: Understand the policies and objectives from the superintendant, receive training in technology, introduce new technology, teach the technology to students, and monitor the success of the students.
Description: The administration, faculty and staff at Clinton P. Russell Elementary school plan to improve student achievement by gathering, analyzing and using data from a variety of sources in order to make informed decisions regarding the integration of technology into curriculum and instruction.
Goals:
• Increase the use of technology to gather and analyze data by 90%.
• Increase the use of available technology in the classroom by 90%.
• Develop a plan for consistent formative assessments that are analyzed in a timely manner in order to impact learning.
• Provide ongoing staff development to meet technology goals.
Tasks Timeline Person(s) Responsible Status
Meet with all stakeholders to review STaR Chart Data familiarize faculty with the National Educational Technology Standards in order evaluate the needs of the school in regards to technology. February, 2010 Mary Haywood (Principal)
Dee Skaggs (Committee Chair) On January 4th, 2010, the committee will present a power point detailing recent STaR Chart data and establishing a committee to use the information as a guideline for reaching NET*S.
Develop a cadre of key personnel to be trained in the use of AEISit software and hardware. November, 2009 Mary Haywood (Principal)
Dee Skaggs, Rick Farrell, Paula Williams (Committee Members) The committee received training in November. The scanners have been ordered and paid for and are scheduled for delivery in late December.
Initiate a system of monthly meetings that are designed to evaluate student data. May, 2010 Mary Haywood (Principal) Rick Farrell, Paula Williams, Shannon Loftis, Rhenette Simpson (CILT) Content meetings are in place which focus on:
• What we want the students to learn.
• How we will measure their learning.
• What we will do if students are having difficulty learning.
The next component to be added is to create a uniform system of assessment and evaluation of that data.
Create and administer a technology needs’ assessment that is personalized to the school environment. January, 2010 Mary Haywood (Principal)
Dee Skaggs (Committee Member) Using the STaR Chart as a guide, the committee is developing a technology needs’ assessment, that allows for scaffolding to reach goals.
Inventory all available technology (hardware and software) in a concise and user friendly manner in order managed our technology assets and stop “pc drift”. February, 2010 Mary Haywood (Principal) ‘
Omar Harris (Campus Technology Directory) An inventory list has been created. The next step is to visit each room in the building, including storage rooms, to document exactly what is available on the campus.
Progress Report
Date Range: October 2009 – May 2010 Team: Clinton P. Russell Technology Team Participants:
M. Haywood, D. Skaggs, R. Farrell, P. Williams, O. Harris, K. Meador, R. Simpson, S. Loftis
Project Description of Project: Clinton P. Russell Elementary set out to improve student achievement by gathering, analyzing and using data from a variety of sources in order to make informed decisions regarding the integration of technology into curriculum and instruction. The project components are: Address staff development needs, asset management and data analysis, all in keeping with Richard DuFours’ ideas that Professional Learning Communities should focus on what the students need to know, ways in which to assess students achievement, and procedures to follow when students are not achieving as expected.
Staff Development Staff Development will focus on the following topics.
• Creating a shared vision that incorporates technology and learning through the use of digital-age resources. Begin by reviewing STaR Chart data. Allow participants to discuss “Why” we are stuck at the Developing Tech. stage, and facilitate a discussion of “How” to move forward.
• The use of hardware and software that is already located on our campus, but is be underused because personnel do not have the proper training or motivation. Review the campus data packet and the CIP. Use data analysis to identify the lowest student expectation from each content area. Create staff development sessions that use technology to improve student achievement in an attempt to integrate instruction and technology.
• Asset management that will allow all faculty members “as needed” access to computer hardware through a system of documented sharing. Staff development session will focus on the available hardware, its uses, how and when to use it, where it is stored, and how to set it up.
• Implement a series of three staff development on the use of AEISit tools.
• Session 1: Using the AEISit software.
• Session 2: Designing common assessments and using the scanner.
• Session 3: Interpreting the data from common assessments and using the data to increase achievement.
• Begin a book study blog. Participants increase their technology comfort level and skills while at the same time increasing their knowledge of their craft.
Evaluation In a effort to appraise the worthiness of all staff development activities in relation to student achievement evaluation will focus on participant’s learning, their use of the new knowledge and the impact it has had on student learning.
• Participant’s Learning: Participants will show mastery of use of new technology through simulations. Participants will “hook up” hardware such as SMART Boards, document cameras, classroom response systems and projectors. Participants will also show mastery of the use of software and programs such as AEISit, SMART technologies, e-blog, and other programs.
• Participant’s Use of New Knowledge and Skills: Learning Walks and peer-to-peer evaluations will be used to access participants use of new technologies.
• Student Learning Outcomes: Campus Data Packet, AEIS data, common assessment and district benchmarks will be used to access the impact of participant’s learning on student achievement.
Results The action plan will be revisited on a monthly basis. Results will be documented and changes will be made as needed to facilitate the integration of technology, curriculum, instruction and student learning.
Job Descriptions
• Superintendent of Schools: Sets policy and objectives as related to technology.
• Information and Technology Executive Director: Implements the superintendant’s policies and objectives as they relate to technology.
• Learning Community Director: interprets and understands the policies and objectives set by the superintendent, transmits information to principals and oversees training and implementation as related to technology.
• Principal: Oversees the implementation of technology at the campus level and coordinates training for the campus technology coordinator. Monitors implementation of technology at the campus level.
• Campus Technology Director: Oversees training for the teachers at the campus level as it pertains to technology.
• Teachers: Understand the policies and objectives from the superintendant, receive training in technology, introduce new technology, teach the technology to students, and monitor the success of the students.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Monday, November 23, 2009
The Texas Long-Range Plan for Technology: Educator Preparation and Development
The area of Educator Preparation and Development refers to educator's ability to collaborate with other professionals in the development of new learning environments that empower students to think critically to solve real-world problems. This area also refers to educators who actively participate in multiple professional development opportunities that support anytime, anywhere learning. Educators who meet the criteria for Advanced Tech in this area have completed 30 or more hours of technology staff development each year and meet all 5 of the SBEC Technology Applications Standards. They also create new customized learning environments and web based lessons.
Progress in this area can be seen nationally, locally and at the state level. At the campus level my chosen campus rates in the Early and Developing Tech ranges for the last 3 consecutive years of the survey. This means that the educators at the campus in question have participated in staff development on basic technology skills and integrating technology into content areas. Educators at this campus have met 2-3 of the SBEC Technology Applications Standards and participate in up to 18 hours of technology staff development per year. They understand the basics of technology and are able to adapt technology for content area use.
In order to move from Developing Tech to Advanced or Target Tech this campus needs to ensure that there is active involvement in a campus vision for technology growth. Technology needs, as evidenced by the School Improvement Plan, should be addressed with the belief that student achievement can be increased by integrating technology into classroom learning environments. School-wide staff development should focus on the use of technology in the classroom and collaboration with other professionals to develop new learning environments that empower students to work collaboratively to solve real-world problems. Finally in an effort to support anytime, anywhere learning the school should develop strategies to connect all students, educators and parents.
Progress in this area can be seen nationally, locally and at the state level. At the campus level my chosen campus rates in the Early and Developing Tech ranges for the last 3 consecutive years of the survey. This means that the educators at the campus in question have participated in staff development on basic technology skills and integrating technology into content areas. Educators at this campus have met 2-3 of the SBEC Technology Applications Standards and participate in up to 18 hours of technology staff development per year. They understand the basics of technology and are able to adapt technology for content area use.
In order to move from Developing Tech to Advanced or Target Tech this campus needs to ensure that there is active involvement in a campus vision for technology growth. Technology needs, as evidenced by the School Improvement Plan, should be addressed with the belief that student achievement can be increased by integrating technology into classroom learning environments. School-wide staff development should focus on the use of technology in the classroom and collaboration with other professionals to develop new learning environments that empower students to work collaboratively to solve real-world problems. Finally in an effort to support anytime, anywhere learning the school should develop strategies to connect all students, educators and parents.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
The Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills Technology Applications
Children learn the value of technology and how it adds to the quality of our lives. To summarize the Pre-k technology, TEKS students are expected to open and navigate through software programs, use and name simple computer input devices like the mouse and keyboard, operate sound recorders and touch screens, use software to create and express ideas and recognize that information can be gathered by using technology
These Pre-K TEKS lay a foundation for the upper grades in much the same way that all Pre-K TEKS do whether it is math, reading, science or technology. They introduce the student to the subject, they allow the student to become familiar and comfortable with the subject and they engage the students curiosity for learning more about the subject.
From Pre-K on the technology TEKS create a dynamic spiraling curriculum. In grades K-2 students gain basic technology skills and use these skills to make presentations and prepare projects in the foundation curriculum. In grades 3-5 students expand on these basic skills by using proper techniques for keyboarding and acquiring information. They learn to solve problems and communicate effectively through technology. In grade 6-8 the students build on their existing knowledge and become fluent in software applications. Finally in grades 9-12 students have a variety of options open to them based on their prior knowledge which allows for growth and preparation in the technological world.
These Pre-K TEKS lay a foundation for the upper grades in much the same way that all Pre-K TEKS do whether it is math, reading, science or technology. They introduce the student to the subject, they allow the student to become familiar and comfortable with the subject and they engage the students curiosity for learning more about the subject.
From Pre-K on the technology TEKS create a dynamic spiraling curriculum. In grades K-2 students gain basic technology skills and use these skills to make presentations and prepare projects in the foundation curriculum. In grades 3-5 students expand on these basic skills by using proper techniques for keyboarding and acquiring information. They learn to solve problems and communicate effectively through technology. In grade 6-8 the students build on their existing knowledge and become fluent in software applications. Finally in grades 9-12 students have a variety of options open to them based on their prior knowledge which allows for growth and preparation in the technological world.
The Texas Long-Range Plan for Technology
After analyzing the Texas Long-Range Plan for Technology, I am supposed to summarize my findings by answering the question, "How can my new learning assist me as an instructional leader who is guiding technology use and integration at my campus?"
Well let me begin by saying that until this unit of study I was not aware of the existence of such a plan. So much for the trickle down theory of information! I knew that once a year, all Texas teachers had to complete a STaR Chart, but I thought that was just another way to find something else for teachers to do in their excessive free time. I was amazingly impressed with the depth of thought that was put into the Texas Long-Range plan and now that I am aware of its existence I can see the effects of it in the individual classrooms.
Taking the time to carefully read and analyze the plan will prepare me to be an instructional leader who is knowledgeable of the goals of the state in the area of technology and to create a vision for my campus which integrates the use of technology into curriculum and instruction. Students and teachers alike will benefit from this knowledge, and as an instructional leader who realizes the impact of technology on today's learner I will be better prepared to budget and plan for a learning environment in which technology plays a key role.
Well let me begin by saying that until this unit of study I was not aware of the existence of such a plan. So much for the trickle down theory of information! I knew that once a year, all Texas teachers had to complete a STaR Chart, but I thought that was just another way to find something else for teachers to do in their excessive free time. I was amazingly impressed with the depth of thought that was put into the Texas Long-Range plan and now that I am aware of its existence I can see the effects of it in the individual classrooms.
Taking the time to carefully read and analyze the plan will prepare me to be an instructional leader who is knowledgeable of the goals of the state in the area of technology and to create a vision for my campus which integrates the use of technology into curriculum and instruction. Students and teachers alike will benefit from this knowledge, and as an instructional leader who realizes the impact of technology on today's learner I will be better prepared to budget and plan for a learning environment in which technology plays a key role.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Technology Assessments
The assignment for this week was to compose a 250-word paper on my my responses and reflections of the two technology assessments in Week 1, including my strengths and weaknesses in educational technology leadership as a principal on my campus. Well, lets start by simply saying, I could easily write the whole 250 words on my weaknesses and skip right past the part about my strengths.
The 3 self-assessments made it clear that if I have even one strength regarding technology, it is my sheer determination to learn. It is also apparent that I have some knowledge of the classroom management and organizational strategies that are needed to manage a technology-supported learning environment, and I do have a clear understanding about the ethics relating to copyright and fair use issue.
Now, onto my weaknesses! The Technology Application Inventory developed by Patsy Lancos drove home the truth that I need to take my technology learning to a higher level. In the Foundations domain I was knowledgeable of less that 50% of the criteria, in Information Acquisition I was knowledgeable in a whopping 60% of the criteria and the Problem Solving and Communications areas I was so weak it is embarrassing.
As a future building administrator these self-assessment are like the proverbial light bulb. If I am going to lead a 21st century learning community, my job starts today. I have no choice but to begin searching out professional development opportunities that will improve my technological literacy.
The State Educational Technology Directors Association Assessment made it clear that not only am I lacking in the area of technology, but that my school is very much in need of a new vision when it comes to using technology to increase learning. Students in my school do not have the opportunity to use computers to create any type of project, or to collaborate with each other, or to even research information. This is the area in which I would most like to see a rapid change. I would like to create a process for sharing best practices with technology so that all teachers can begin to see the ways and means in which to allow technology to support educational improvements in every classroom and for every student.
The 3 self-assessments made it clear that if I have even one strength regarding technology, it is my sheer determination to learn. It is also apparent that I have some knowledge of the classroom management and organizational strategies that are needed to manage a technology-supported learning environment, and I do have a clear understanding about the ethics relating to copyright and fair use issue.
Now, onto my weaknesses! The Technology Application Inventory developed by Patsy Lancos drove home the truth that I need to take my technology learning to a higher level. In the Foundations domain I was knowledgeable of less that 50% of the criteria, in Information Acquisition I was knowledgeable in a whopping 60% of the criteria and the Problem Solving and Communications areas I was so weak it is embarrassing.
As a future building administrator these self-assessment are like the proverbial light bulb. If I am going to lead a 21st century learning community, my job starts today. I have no choice but to begin searching out professional development opportunities that will improve my technological literacy.
The State Educational Technology Directors Association Assessment made it clear that not only am I lacking in the area of technology, but that my school is very much in need of a new vision when it comes to using technology to increase learning. Students in my school do not have the opportunity to use computers to create any type of project, or to collaborate with each other, or to even research information. This is the area in which I would most like to see a rapid change. I would like to create a process for sharing best practices with technology so that all teachers can begin to see the ways and means in which to allow technology to support educational improvements in every classroom and for every student.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
